Lowcost way to increase I-35 capacity through Austin

[longhorn]

The fact nothing has been done to increase the lanes and safety through Austin is a travesty, one can blame TxDot or the City Council. However a quick way to add a lane to the present 6 lanes.................yes only 6 lanes save a three mile stretch where its 8 including the split..........It is to convert the inside shoulder against the concrete median to a fourth lane each direction. I believe this has been done to I-35 south of Town lake ( for us old timers will always be Town lake and not Lady Bird lake), to expand to its present 6 lanes so it will have to await the rumored rebuild from downtown to hwy 71. North of downtown Txdot actually uses the inside lane at various spots on I-35 when adding a short entrance and exit lanes.

Why TxDot has not done this yet is beyond me. No environmental studies need to be done, next time I-35 is up for it repaving (by the look how much crack sealant used it should be soon) stripe the inside area as a lane instead of a shoulder.

[froggie]

No environmental studies need to be done

Not true.  Federal law would require an environmental study in the case of a capacity expansion...even if said expansion does not require new construction.  The only way this wouldn't be the case is if TxDOT anticipated restriping that shoulder at some point in the future and included that in the environmental study done for the construction.  But, even then, FHWA may require a study supplement.

[MaxConcrete]

https://www.youtube.com/user/TxDOTpio

TxDOT recently posted animated depictions of two options to improve I-35 through downtown, one option to widen the existing elevated structure and one option to place the freeway in a tunnel. Obviously the tunnel option would be far more expensive. I would expect the tunnel to get much more public support, but cold hard financial reality could make the elevated expansion the best option for relief any time soon.

Unfortunately both options are not large enough. Both are 4-1H-1H-4 (H=HOV/HOT). As usual, the Austin approach is too little, too late. But right-of-way acquisition is probably not feasible and money is always scarce, so options are limited.

[longhorn]

https://www.youtube.com/user/TxDOTpio

TxDOT recently posted animated depictions of two options to improve I-35 through downtown, one option to widen the existing elevated structure and one option to place the freeway in a tunnel. Obviously the tunnel option would be far more expensive. I would expect the tunnel to get much more public support, but cold hard financial reality could make the elevated expansion the best option for relief any time soon.

Unfortunately both options are not large enough. But are 4-1H-1H-4 (H=HOV/HOT). As usual, the Austin approach is too little, too late. But right-of-way acquisition is probably not feasible and money is always scarce, so options are limited.

Hence my idea, its a quick way to get to 8 lanes.

[jakeroot]

Maybe they should toll I-35 through central Austin. This might encourage through traffic to use SH-130 (which is under-utilized).

[mgk920]

Big Rig Steve drove I-35 northbound between San Antonio and the DFW area a few days ago - stop and go (LOS 'F') right at sunrise south of downtown, but traffic loosened up at the split.  It was heavy and slow southbound until at least the US 183/290 area.

Mike

[longhorn]

http://www.bizjournals.com/austin/news/2016/01/05/austin-mayor-rail-i-35-toll-lanes-to-be-priorities.html

So they are going to take my idea but instead make it a toll lane............Great, just great.

[Bobby5280]

I don't think this inside shoulder re-striping idea would work. There's hardly any inside shoulder (or just none at all) along I-35 through downtown Austin. The outer shoulders aren't really big enough either.

Also, doesn't current Interstate standards mandate inner and outer shoulders of certain widths? Here in Oklahoma there was quite a bit of construction on some turnpikes and other Interstates to widen shoulders and add cable barriers.

In the near term I suppose planners in Austin are hoping the big road upgrade projects for the Mopac/TX-1, US-183 and TX-71 will pull some traffic off I-35. Removing the tolls on TX-130 might help a little as well.

[DJStephens]

Believe all interstate highways with six lanes or more require a full width inside shoulder.  Cheaping out by striping the inside shoulder is a dangerous regressive move.  A similar thing was done in El Paso, on interstate 10, just east of the "spaghetti" bowl.  The eastbound alignment was "shifted" onto the inside shoulder, instead of removing and replacing an ancient four span bridge (Raynolds Ave) which predates the circa 1971 "spaghetti" bowl.   Circa 2000.   Weaving issues in the area, US 54/I-110 southbound to I-10 eastbound and the Paisano / US 62/180 off ramp were also not addressed.   Quite a bit of "aesthetics" was done on the area in recent times, instead of fixing the design deficiencies. 

[longhorn]

Well TxDot is doing it already in some areas, such as between Rundberg and Braker and in Round Rock. Its done to allow extended on and off ramp lanes. So if that's the case it can be done form Round Rock to downtown Austin.

[Brandon]

One could increase the total capacity of the region by having parallel surface streets that can handle a lot of traffic.  Think US-24 (Telegraph Rd) or M-102 (8 Mile Rd) in Metro Detroit.  Streets like these become alternates to the freeways and can pull traffic off the parallel freeways that might otherwise be on those freeways.

[Marc]

One could increase the total capacity of the region by having parallel surface streets that can handle a lot of traffic.

Austin is too busy reducing vehicle lanes in favor of bike lanes on most surface streets.

[kphoger]

Well TxDot is doing it already in some areas, such as between Rundberg and Braker and in Round Rock. Its done to allow extended on and off ramp lanes. So if that's the case it can be done form Round Rock to downtown Austin.

I've been on I-35 near Round Rock when there had been a wreck in the left lane and no shoulder to move the cars to. NOT a fun situation.

[jeffandnicole]

Converting a shoulder to a travel lane is generally done when every other option is exhausted in extreme circumstances.  There are numerous examples where there is no full left shoulder on a highway of 3+ lanes, along with areas that convert right shoulders to travel lanes, areas with minimal shoulders, etc, but it's usually not a recommended option.

Going back to the OP's opening sentence "The fact nothing has been done to increase the lanes and safety through Austin is a travesty"...the full shoulder is actually there to improve safety, as it provides an area for vehicles to quickly exit a lane, as well as a place for emergency traffic to use.  In the event of an accident, it provides a place to move accident vehicles.  By converting a shoulder to a travel lane, you're reducing safety, not increasing it.

How much of a bottleneck does this 3 lane-per-direction area cause, in terms of both mileage and length of time? 

[texaskdog]

Or continue upgrading US 281 between Wichita Falls and San Antonio.  Spread the word (it's 12 minutes slower on a no-traffic day) and continue upgrading over the years, it will help Austin AND Fort Worth Traffic!!

[kphoger]

Or continue upgrading US 281 between Wichita Falls and San Antonio.  Spread the word (it's 12 minutes slower on a no-traffic day) and continue upgrading over the years, it will help Austin AND Fort Worth Traffic!!

I studied that route in depth a year and half ago, when I had vowed to never drive through Fort Worth again but hadn't yet decided to switch from crossing the border at Colombia to crossing at Ciudad Acuña. 281 does have plenty of passing lanes and such, but it also goes through a lot of towns along the way. When I totaled up the number of stoplights, it was a little sickening. Improving that situation would require several bypasses. Not least of the problem areas is northern San Antonio itself, where people seem to think superstreet intersections are an acceptable alternative to actual freeway interchanges.

[texaskdog]

Or continue upgrading US 281 between Wichita Falls and San Antonio.  Spread the word (it's 12 minutes slower on a no-traffic day) and continue upgrading over the years, it will help Austin AND Fort Worth Traffic!!

I studied that route in depth a year and half ago, when I had vowed to never drive through Fort Worth again but hadn't yet decided to switch from crossing the border at Colombia to crossing at Ciudad Acuña. 281 does have plenty of passing lanes and such, but it also goes through a lot of towns along the way. When I totaled up the number of stoplights, it was a little sickening. Improving that situation would require several bypasses. Not least of the problem areas is northern San Antonio itself, where people seem to think superstreet intersections are an acceptable alternative to actual freeway interchanges.

I looked again and it was 45 minutes longer (but more scenic) but figure that's one good traffic jam in either Austin or San Antonio.  A lot of it is 4 lanes and while make it a freeway is decades off, they could bypass a few key towns and bypass Hico to the west and they'd funnel a lot of traffic away from Fort Worth & Austin

There is also a way to cut SW from Fort Worth to 281 that is only a tad longer.  If we didn't live in Austin we'd take this route.

[7/8]

Converting a shoulder to a travel lane is generally done when every other option is exhausted in extreme circumstances.  There are numerous examples where there is no full left shoulder on a highway of 3+ lanes, along with areas that convert right shoulders to travel lanes, areas with minimal shoulders, etc, but it's usually not a recommended option.

Going back to the OP's opening sentence "The fact nothing has been done to increase the lanes and safety through Austin is a travesty"...the full shoulder is actually there to improve safety, as it provides an area for vehicles to quickly exit a lane, as well as a place for emergency traffic to use.  In the event of an accident, it provides a place to move accident vehicles.  By converting a shoulder to a travel lane, you're reducing safety, not increasing it.

I saw an accident on the 401 WB through Toronto and as you could imagine, traffic was very backed up. Without full-width shoulders, there's no way the ambulances or fire trucks would have made it to the crash scene in a reasonable amount of time. I agree that converting shoulders to traffic lanes shouldn't be taken lightly.

[Bobby5280]

US-281 isn't usually all that great an alternative Wichita Falls to San Antonio route as opposed to taking US-287 to Fort Worth and I-35. It's not a very direct route and most of the road is really 2 lane with passing lanes added every once in awhile. I wish a lot more of it was four-laned. US-281 not only has lots of stop lights and stop signs along the way, but speed limits ramp up and down. If you have a lead foot you're much more likely to get a speeding ticket. Plus, lots of trucks take that route avoiding the DFW snarl.

Of course I-35W in Fort Worth is all jacked up with massive construction. But it won't stay that way forever.

I just wish TxDOT could get more of US-287 between Wichita Falls and Fort Worth upgraded to Interstate quality. There's a couple of projects on the books for areas NW and SE of Decatur, but nothing yet for cleaning up US-287 in Decatur.

As for upgrades on US-281, the best I can see for the road between Wichita Falls and San Antonio is an Interstate quality upgrade from San Antonio's North side up to Blanco or maybe even Johnson City. It would be a basic four laned road North of that. Maybe some towns could get freeway quality bypasses, but it's a big question mark on where you build a bypass with strangely laid out towns like Lampasas.

I've heard ideas floated before about upgrading US-281 as an Interstate quality relief route for I-35 to bypass Austin and DFW, even from a military angle of better connecting posts like Fort Hood, Fort Sill, Fort Sam Houston, Lackland AFB, Sheppard AFB, etc. "I-33" would be an obvious designation. That concept would make more sense than the I-14 nonsense being floated around Killeen.

[texaskdog]

Probably my ideas on other posts.  But really if you put a freeway in there it would be much faster for those not needing to go anywhere in between.  No reason it can't just be an extension of I-37

[kphoger]

277 through Texas serves just fine, even though almost none of it is four lanes south of Abilene, which leads me to believe it's not the number of lanes that matters here. The big difference with 281, IMO, is the number and size of the towns it goes through, along with the corresponding stoplights and stop signs. Bypasses sound great but, as was mentioned, that would be some huge projects.

[longhorn]

Again, taking the left shoulder is not the preferred method for the reasons stated, but we are talking about a quick solution to a long term problem. I-35 from 290/Koenig interchange in the north to the 290/Ben White interchange in the south through Austin does not have a left shoulder.

[texaskdog]

277 through Texas serves just fine, even though almost none of it is four lanes south of Abilene, which leads me to believe it's not the number of lanes that matters here. The big difference with 281, IMO, is the number and size of the towns it goes through, along with the corresponding stoplights and stop signs. Bypasses sound great but, as was mentioned, that would be some huge projects.

there's not much out there though, easy ground to build a buypass here and there

[jeffandnicole]

Again, taking the left shoulder is not the preferred method for the reasons stated, but we are talking about a quick solution to a long term problem. I-35 from 290/Koenig interchange in the north to the 290/Ben White interchange in the south through Austin does not have a left shoulder.

Here's are a few areas where there's 3 lanes, and no full left shoulder: https://goo.gl/maps/7XoENCTATmD2 & https://goo.gl/maps/tk1TG1x6hSF2

THAT'S why your idea won't work.  If the shoulder doesn't exist thru the entire area, it can't be done.

[kphoger]

277 through Texas serves just fine, even though almost none of it is four lanes south of Abilene, which leads me to believe it's not the number of lanes that matters here. The big difference with 281, IMO, is the number and size of the towns it goes through, along with the corresponding stoplights and stop signs. Bypasses sound great but, as was mentioned, that would be some huge projects.

there's not much out there though, easy ground to build a buypass here and there

We're fairly far off-topic by now, but...  in my opinion...

Jacksboro is OK without a bypass;
In Mineral Wells, you could utilize FM-1821 and FM-1195 as a bypass, by adding grade separation in two or three places;
In Stephenville, add grade separation through the entire corridor.
Hico is fine as is;
In Hamilton, change the current alignment to one-way SB, then put the NB traffic on a newly one-way Bell Street;
Lampasas is hopeless without an entirely new-alignment bypass of the town, which is difficult due to the town's layout;
In Burnet, change the current alignment to one-way SB, then put the NB traffic on a newly one-way Main Street;
Marble Falls is hopeless without full grade separation through at least half the town;
Blanco is fine as is;
Everything from Blanco to San Antonio should be fully divided freeway.

That's a lot of work.

In reality, though, the true bypass of Austin has already been built:  TX-130.  The major downside is that you still have to drive through Dallas—Fort Worth in order to utilize it.  People not wanting to use TX-130 or MoPac undoubtedly has a lot to do with Austin's congestion.